Subject: Re: /usr/local in PATH
To: NetBSD Users's Discussion List <>
From: Greg A. Woods <>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 09/30/2007 12:56:15
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At Sun, 30 Sep 2007 02:53:52 +0000, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
Subject: Re: /usr/local in PATH
> Third -- lack of system maintainability is itself a security risk,
> because it makes it harder to upgrade when that's needed.

That's a very good point -- I think it's more or less what I was trying
to get at in the first place about having /usr/local and it's underlying
structure documented, at least as a guide, in hier(7).

The other points you've raised are also very good arguments for
reversing the removal of /usr/local and it's creation from the base
system mtree files and installation procedures.

If one tries to make a system too clean and with too much internalized
navel gazing one ends up with something like POSIX which cannot be used
on its own for any real-world purpose, and which probably cannot even
stand up on its own.

						Greg A. Woods

H:+1 416 218-0098 W:+1 416 489-5852 x122 VE3TCP RoboHack <>
Planix, Inc. <>       Secrets of the Weird <>

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
MessageID: hVQgJ2tAbGvh0Dj4VtxtB+3s7h17Vahe